IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8853 of 2022 Date of Decision: 13.8.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sanjay Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …… Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Sharma and Mr. Bhim Singh, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): CMP No. 18853 of 2025 For the reasons stated in the application, same is al- lowed. Application stands disposed of accordingly. CWP No. 8853 of 2022 2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 17.4.2018 passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in CWP No. 2413 of 2017, titled Kapil Chauhan v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., in a time bound manner. Learned 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Additional Advocate General is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Having perused the averments contained in the petition as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated by Division Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment supra. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Kapil Chauhan (supra) expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 13, 2025 manjit